Response: Obviously this is cannot be a violation of religious freedom so free speech is the issue.

What I don’t understand is why “Choose Life” is necessarily the opposite of pro-choice. Isn’t choosing life for one’s baby/fetus one of the choices that women are supposed to be free to choose? It goes to show that some activists who claim to be ‘pro-choice’ are really pro-abortion instead if they find the alternate choice of life as only representative of the opposition.

I can only conclude that either the judge is this case was biased or the lawyers defending the license plate did not do a good job in properly explaining how “Choose Life” could represent both sides of the abortion divide. After all it really is one of the ‘choices’ that are currently available to women in America since Roe v. Wade. *Top